Research on group therapy typically defines one dimension of the therapeutic process (i.e., cohesion, feedback, self-disclosure) in space or evolving through time. As a result, little is learned regarding the interconnectedness, relatedness, or interaction of these important dimensions of what is occurring within the group. In recent years, the articulation of chaos theory-the science of process rather than of state-has unfolded andfound application in the behavioral sciences. In this article, central principles underlying chaos theory are described and the mathematics of chaos are applied to interaction from a short-ternm psychotherapy group. Differences in the pattern of complexity inherent in interactions of group members werefound in the individual sessions when compared to the group as a whole.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bakeman, R. , & Gottman, J. M. (1989). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Barlow, S. (1988). Sequential analysis of therapist communication styles in time limited group psychotherapy. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Atlanta, Georgia.
3.
Baumol, W. J. , & Benhabib, J. (1989). Chaos: Significance, mechanism, and economic applications. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(1), 77-105.
4.
Belsham, R. L. (1988). Examination of verbal interaction during group psychotherapy using sequential analysis. Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
5.
Briggs, J. , & Peat, F. D. (1989). Turbulent mirror: An illustrated guide to chaos theory and the science of wholeness. New York: Harper & Row.
6.
Burlingame, G. M. , Barlow, S., & Stinchfield, R. (1987). Specific and nonspecificfactors in time-limited group psychotherapy. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Society for Psychotherapy Research, Ulm, West Germany.
7.
Burlingame, G. M. , & Fuhriman, A. (1991a). Deterministic chaos: A comparison offour psychotherapy groups. Paper presented at the inaugural conference for a Society for the Study of Chaos Theory in Psychology, San Francisco, CA.
8.
Burlingame, G. M. , & Fuhriman, A. (1991b). Deterministic chaos in group psychotherapy interaction: An illustration. Paper presented at the annual conference of Society for Psychotherapy Research, Lyon, France.
9.
Burlingame, G. M. , & Fuhriman, A. (1992). Evidence for short-and long-term dynamical interaction patterns in time-limited group therapy. Paper presented at the second annual conference of the Society for the Study of Chaos Theory in Psychology, Washington, DC.
10.
Burlingame, G. M. , Fuhriman, A., & Barnum, K. (in press). Group therapy as a nonlinear dynamic system: Analysis of therapeutic communication for chaotic patterns. In A. Gilgen & F. Abraham (Eds), Chaos theory in psychology. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
11.
Burlingame, G. M. , Fuhriman, A., Barnum, K., & Lyman, R. (1991, July). Deterministic chaos in group psychotherapy interaction: An illustration. Paper presented at the Society for Psychotherapy Research 22nd Annual Meeting, Lyon, France.
12.
Campbell, D. , Crutchfield, J., Farmer, D., & Jen, E. (1985). Experimental mathematics: The role of computation in nonlinear science. Communications of the ACM, 28(4), 374-384.
13.
Crutchfield, J. P. , Farmer, J. D., Packard, N. H., & Shaw, R. S. (1986). Chaos. Scientific American, 255(6), 46-57.
14.
Drescher, S. (1988). Therapeuticfactors and verbal interaction style in group psychotherapy. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Atlanta, Georgia.
15.
Fuhriman, A. , & Burlingame, G. M. (1991). Chaos: Emerging developmental patterns in process research. Paper presented at the annual conference of Society for Psychotherapy Research, Lyon, France.
16.
Fuhriman, A. , Drescher, S., & Burlingame, G. M. (1984). Conceptualizing small group process. Small Group Behavior, 15, 427-440.
17.
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Penguin.
18.
Goldberger, A. L. , Rigney, D. R., & West, B. J. (1990). Chaos and fractals in human physiology. Scientific American, 262(2), 42-49.
19.
Gottman, J. M. , & Roy, A. K. (1990). Sequential analysis: A guide for behavior researchers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Grassberger, P. , & Procaccia, I. (1983). Characterization of strange attractors. Physical Review Letters, 50(5), 346-349.
21.
Greenberg, L. S. , & Pinsof, W. M. (1986). Process research: Current trends and future perspectives. In L. S. Greenberg & W. M. Pinsof (Eds.), The psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook. New York: Guilford.
22.
Hayles, N. K. (1990). Chaos bound: Orderly disorder in contemporary literature and science. New York: Comell University Press.
23.
Hill, W. F. (1965). Hill interaction matrix. Los Angeles: University of Southern California Press.
24.
Jantsch, E. (1980). The self-organizing universe. Oxford: Pergamon.
25.
Kiesler, D. J. (1973). The process of psychotherapy: Empiricalfoundations and systems of analysis. Chicago: Aldine.
26.
Prigogine, I. , & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos: Man's new dialogue with nature. New York: Bantam.
27.
Rice, L. N. , & Greenberg, L. S. (1984). Patterns of change: Intensive analysis of psychotherapy process. New York: Guilford.
28.
Richards, D. (1990). Is strategic decision making chaotic?Behavioral Science, 35, 219-232.
29.
Shaw, R. (1981). Modeling chaotic systems. In H. Haken (ed.), Chaos and order in nature: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Synergetics at Schlob Elmau, Bavaria (pp. 218-231). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
30.
Sterman, J. D. (1988). Deterministic chaos in models of human behavior: Methodological issues and experimental results. System Dynamic Review, 4, 148-178.
31.
Sugihara, G. , & May, R. M. (1990). Nonlinear forecasting as a way of distinguishing chaos from measurement error in time series. Nature, 344, 734-741.
32.
Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Simon & Schuster.
